Aqueduct

All posts tagged Aqueduct

Why is NYRA not responding to the latest attack by the New York Times?

Posted by noonante on January 6, 2015
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , , . 2 Comments

The Sunday New York Times featured the latest in the paper’s dyspeptic campaign against horse racing, this time a broadside leveled at Aqueduct Racetrack.  I find it surprising that the New York Racing Association has been silent in the face of an attack on the track that accounts for one-half of its annual race dates.

The piece was a photo essay in the Metropolitan section of the paper.  There were six images  –  none of which I found particularly interesting  –  but the accompanying text by a Times staffer is what was odious.  After an introductory sentence about racing providing one of the great American spectacles, we finished with six paragraphs that were downright laughable.

While saying that the Aqueduct facility is a “decaying building populated by lonely old men” may have elements of truth, the 24-year old photography student from Italy had other observations apparently based on his extensive experience.  For example, he encountered  – and I hope you are sitting down for this  –  someone who was divorced.  He observed that “[t]there is a lot of psychological damage there….  Not all of them should be free on the street.”

The kicker, however, was this one:  “One guy’s first memory of a racetrack was his father dying of a heart attack at a racetrack.  Most of the people had a story like that.”  While that certainly trumps being DQ’d from a winning Pick 6, “most people” have traumatic memories from the track?

Now, I have not been to Aqueduct in a few years since I live several hours away and can watch and wager from the comfort of my living room.  But the condition of the building was the subject of a flurry of criticism a year ago (when the photographs were taken), and from what I can gather, much has been done to improve its appearance.  Alan Mann of the blog Left at the Gate posted photographs last year of a clean and freshly-painted facility.  NYRA CEO Chris Kay presented a slide show at the last Board of Directors meeting describing what seem to be significant improvements.

It appears that the nation’s leading newspaper cannot be counted on to conduct even basic factual reporting when they have the opportunity to take a shot at racing.  But where is NYRA?  Not only are they running Aqueduct, but should be the leading voice supporting New York racing.  Kay purports to be an advocate for the fan experience.  He even hired a “Chief Experience Officer,” paying her a salary equal to that of the General Counsel.  Neither of them can respond to an attack on their product?

I am not suggesting that there are not issues concerning Aqueduct, some of which are considerably more serious that those alleged by the Times.  But if I am running a business, I do not let shoddy journalism go unanswered.  Unless, of course, there is a different agenda and the Times‘ hit piece furthers the interests of those wishing to close the track.

 

 

NYRA Board continues to spin its wheels

Posted by noonante on March 10, 2014
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , , , , , . 2 Comments

If you were hoping for a vision of the future for New York’s racing  from last week’s NYRA Board meeting, it was just more deja vu all over again.

The Wednesday meeting was the 11th of Governor Andrew Cuomo’s “Reorganization Board” and comes a little over a year before the Board must recommend legislation to remove state government from running New York’s racing.  Given an abbreviated meeting that focused on the filthy conditions at Aqueduct Racetrack, however, you would not know what potentially significant changes may be on the horizon, let alone just off shore.

I am beginning to appreciate what it must be like to teach a junior high school class.  I am not sure any Board member takes notes or can recollect what occurred at a prior meeting.  The main topic for any meeting tends to be what a member just says off the top of his head.  (I use the male pronoun consciously.  Of the 21 Board members, 20 are white men.)  This month the topic du jour was the conditions at Aqueduct.

One would think the conditions have to be deplorable since the Board member who raised the issue  –  Len Riggio  – saw his undefeated colt Samraat prevail in a stirring stretch duel over two others, putting him squarely in the Kentucky Derby picture.  Yet his experience, and that of his guests, was diminished because of an Aqueduct he described as “dirty” and “dangerous.”

I must say I was surprised that the cleanliness of Aqueduct is still an issue since it was also the main topic of conversation at the Board’s initial meeting in December, 2012.  A month later, then-CEO Ellen McClain announced that NYRA had taken over cleaning the facility from Genting, the racino operator that co-locates its Video Lottery Terminals at the Aqueduct facility.

It turns out that NYRA is not yet responsible for the food service and cleaning of the areas where food is served  –  which is where Riggio had his Gotham Stakes experience.  The portion of the facility that NYRA is responsible for?  Check out the photographs from Alan Mann’s blog Left at the Gate.  It may not be the box seats at Saratoga, but it rather obviously is not dirty or shabby.

Yet no one disputed Riggio’s assertion that Aqueduct is “dirty” and “dangerous.”  No one  –  neither another Board member nor any member of the NYRA staff.  And this from a group that never shrinks from proclaiming its commitment to bringing new fans to the sport.  Predictably, the news coverage of the meeting was dominated by the conditions at the track as reported by a single Board member.

This discussion did, however, highlight two major shortcomings of the Board under the leadership of David Skorton, the President of Cornell University.  The first is the lack of a meaningful or useful agenda.  Unless there is a truly insignificant issue  –  for this meeting it was the election of two Board members to a committee  –  each agenda looks like every other one:  CEO’s report, CFO’s report, Chairman’s report, etc., etc.  There is never a specific topic on the agenda that would warrant a Board consisting of successful businessmen and professionals to actually put some thought into an issue prior to discussing it.  Accordingly, the meeting then revolves around whatever random thought a particular Board member may utter, provided he gets it out before any other member raises his pet peeve.

The second problem is the lack of any sense there is a long-term vision, and a total lack of follow-up on any matters that require planning and execution.  The condition of the food services at Aqueduct is a perfect example.  At his first meeting in December, 2012, Skorton directed McClain to prepare a report on the contract with Genting because it was responsible for food services and cleaning the facility.   At Wednesday’s meeting  –  15 months later  –  that same contract was cited as an impediment from NYRA being able to improve the conditions in the dining area of which Riggio complained.

Another example stems from the bizarre reality that you can bet on a horse race in Hauppauge, Hoosick Falls or New Lebanon, but not in Manhattan.  McClain identified the locating of betting terminals in New York City restaurants as a major priority.  Two of current CEO Chris Kay’s top priorities are improving customer service and bringing financial stability to NYRA.  Yet the proposal to expand wagering in New York City  –  an important way to both increase customer service and assist NYRA financially  –  has gone nowhere.

Chairman Skorton does, however, persistently insert, in an almost subliminal way, certain themes.  For this meeting there is his view of the necessity of NYRA operating without the revenues from the VLT terminals.  This has been a constant refrain over recent months.  Then there was the spectre of NYRA having to soon make some “really hard decisions.”  He did not identify what any of those hard decisions might be.  And no one asked him.

Because of the immediacy of making those decisions, Skorton raised the possibility of having more frequent Board meetings  –  the next scheduled one is after Memorial Day  –  and said it should be discussed at the end of the meeting.  There was certainly a sufficient amount of time  –  the scheduled two-hour meeting adjourned in 80 minutes  –  but the subject apparently slipped his mind and no one else raised it

NYRA is facing major issues  –  continuing Aqueduct as a race track, operating without VLT revenues, and the structuring of the next new NYRA which has an expiration date of October, 2015.  When Chairman Skorton raised the possibility of more frequent meetings, it was with the notion of discussing these matters in a public forum.  While open discussions are the way to go for a government agency that controls an industry employing tens of thousands and has such an impact on New York’s economy, I doubt that there really is a desire to have those talks in public.  The deafening silence to his proposal  –  as well as his forgetting about it  –  is sufficient testament to that.  Or perhaps it is another example of the short attention span of the Board.

Skorton did let slip a very revealing comment during the meeting.  In stressing the importance of balancing NYRA’s budget, he said it was to aid those people coming next to run NYRA.  Then he said the next people are “hopefully us.”

That may be his hope, but there are many who think New York has already had enough of Andrew Cuomo’s control of New York racing.  And what can you say about a group that spends fifteen months talking about  –  but not fixing  –  the problem of a dirty restaurant?

New NYRA – where’s it at?

Posted by noonante on November 4, 2013
Posted in: Horse Racing, Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , , , , , , , . 1 Comment

It’s been more than a year since the NYRA Reorganization Board was established.  Since the law written by Governor Andrew Cuomo calls for it to disappear three years after its creation, this is a time to look at what difference it has made to New York’s racing.

The “new” NYRA was deemed necessary by the Governor, who browbeat the former NYRA Board and a somnolent Legislature in May of 2012 to give him control of New York’s racing, despite the Governor’s admission that he did “not know this industry especially well.”  He waited four months before signing the law, and did not appoint his Board members until October 18.  The purported reason for the dramatic step of state government taking over the industry was a supposedly “scandalous” prior NYRA that had failed to make a one percent reduction in takeout in some exotic wagers.  (Never mind that the promised review by the Inspector General has never materialized, nor that Cuomo’s new Board concluded there was no intentional misconduct by the prior NYRA’s leadership.)

Cuomo named David Skorton, President of Cornell University, as Chairman of the new Board and made seven additional appointments to go along with four appointments by the legislative leadership and five appointments by the old NYRA.  Skorton, who has no experience with horse racing, was praised at the time because he once stayed in a Cornell dorm room.  Skorton viewed the problem with the prior NYRA as resulting from a lack of “leadership and management,” and promised to run a transparent and accountable organization.

So, what has he accomplished?  Answering that question is somewhat difficult since, despite the promise of transparency, the “new” NYRA has been anything but.  We are left with what has been discussed at the public meetings of the Reorganization Board.

Chairman Skorton’s first priority was to focus on the safety of the participants in New York’s races.  A Task Force that was appointed and made a comprehensive report prior to Skorton’s arrival on the scene, had recommended a number of changes to how NYRA and the state conduct racing.  Some of the significant changes proposed in the Report were made by a separate state agency, the Gaming Commission that has the authority to issue regulations.  They made changes in rules governing the administration of some medications, as well as modifications to claiming rules.  For its part, NYRA appointed a committee to review safety policies, another committee to investigate racing fatalities, and have started conducting necropsies of catastrophically injured horses.

Of the Task Force’s 39 main recommendations and 93 subordinate proposals  –  a number of which required action by the Gaming Commission  –  how many did NYRA implement?  We do not know because NYRA has refused to provide any information regarding their action or inaction.

At one point this year, it appeared that the Gaming Commission regulations and NYRA’s focus on safety may have produced results.  Following some earlier fatalities at Aqueduct, there was a marked decrease in catastrophic breakdowns at the spring meetings.  Unfortunately, that trend stopped during the Saratoga meet, and while Belmont fall meeting fatalities are down from six in 2012 to four this year, it has not mirrored what appeared to be a significant success.  The cause of fatal breakdown is a complex one with many contributing factors, but NYRA’s failure to divulge information as to what they have done does not benefit horses, riders or the industry.

Another priority became the hiring of a new Chief Executive Officer.  While Administration sources reportedly said there would be a “nationwide search” commencing in October and that there had already been considerable interest expressed by experienced racing executives, the new Board did not begin the search until the end of February.  They ended up hiring unemployed business executive Christopher Kay who, unlike his boss, had actually been to a horse race  –  albeit 40 years ago.  As an indication of the Governor’s interest in the industry he now controls, as well as the juice Kay will possess when it comes to making decisions affecting New York racing, Cuomo did not even meet with Kay prior to his being hired.  Although Kay signed a $550,000 contract, apparently it did not call for him to be ready as CEO on day 1.  The Times Union has reported that NYRA also paid a consultant $75,000 to “mentor” him.

The issue that prompted the most discussion at the Board was a proposed contract for an Advance Deposit Wagering platform.  The Gaming Commission’s Acting Director Rob Williams, supported by Cuomo’s Budget Director and Board member Robert Megna, had expressed reservations about the process used to select the winning bidder.  Since the contract was expected to bring in between $3 and $5 million each quarter (starting with the one we are in), it was not an insignificant matter for NYRA to get right.  This is particularly important because of the insistence by Williams and Megna of NYRA becoming self-sufficient without relying on  the VLT revenues from the racino at Aqueduct.  While I agree that the procurement process was fatally flawed, neither Williams nor Megna did much to bring the matter to resolution, even though it could have been resolved with a phone call to Skorton.  Despite the hectoring on VLT revenues, the two Cuomo employees allowed the process to drag on for months.  While Chairman Skorton  –  the “leadership and management” advocate  –  said he would work the matter out in April, he did nothing and the full Board ended up withdrawing the procurement at its June 18 meeting.  So in the six months after then-CEO Ellen McClain identified this as a problem, the Board sat on its hands, and a technology that was expected to start a month ago has been delayed while a new procurement is conducted. 

So that is one person’s assessment of what the new NYRA has “accomplished” in its first year of operation.  Although it is a 17-member Board with several “Special Advisors,”  David Skorton is clearly in charge.  If you follow the activities of the Cuomo Administration, you are not going to see much independent behavior, and this Board does not disappoint in that regard.  In all of the Board meetings, there has only been one vote that has not been unanimous  –  the decision to withdraw the ADW contract.  The “discussion” at the meeting to select the CEO lasted all of eight minutes.

In addition, Skorton’s promise of transparency has been as hollow as that of the Governor’s frequent invocation of that phrase while doing the exact opposite.  (The law establishing the new NYRA was laughingly entitled “New York state racing franchise accountability and transparency act of 2012.”)  NYRA consistently refuses to release documents that are clearly public ones  –  a prime example being Kay’s $550,000 contract and performance goals.  Skorton said all decision-making meetings of NYRA would be public, but only one committee  –  Equine Safety  – has regularly conducted its business in the open.

These are not esoteric matters.  NYRA has three significant decisions on its plate that could have a profound and long-lasting impact on New York racing and the tens of thousands of jobs dependent on it.

The first is whether NYRA should start to operate as if there are no VLT revenues.  Skorton tried to sneak this through in the last minutes of the August meeting of the Board.  In a rare show of independence, there was sufficient backlash for the Chairman to back down.  The VLT revenue is important because a racing operation that has operated at a loss without the revenue operates profitably with them.  The VLT revenues, incidentally, come from the profits of the casino operator, not “state subsidies” as Cuomo Administration figures continually say.

The Board must also come up with a plan to “reprivatize” NYRA.  The law creating the new Board calls for a report on this to be made by April 2015  –  less than 18 months from now.  There have been leaked stories from Cuomo’s Administration raising possibilities ranging from Santa Anita (sic) to Madison Square Garden (double sic) as potential franchise holders.

The third big issue comes to us courtesy of The New York Daily News.  The Governor has apparently decided that Aqueduct is a “waste”  –  which to the Governor’s mind means property that could be transferred to real estate developers.  Robert Megna, who attended the meeting with the editorial board, stated that Skorton and Kay are studying the possibility of closing Aqueduct “very closely.”

So, there you have it.  As a frequent examiner of past performances, when the Governor says something, the only response one can expect from his appointees is “Yes, Sir!”  We thus have the uncomfortable scenario in which three people who know nothing about racing or the breeding industry are on a path to make decisions profoundly affecting both.  And, it is clear they intend to make those decisions in secret to the extent they can get away with it.  Skorton already said as much at the August Board meeting on the subject of the VLT revenues.

It is not as though there are not plenty of talented people with a wealth of knowledge and experience who deserve to be part of these discussions.  They can be found on back stretches, farms, industry organizations or working for NYRA.  Each of these issues is significant and complex and would benefit for a full and open airing.  They don’t lend themselves to the sound bites of a Governor’s reelection campaign.